Proposed Wording for Mask and Clip Effects on Pointer Events (ACTION-2372)

Hi, SVG WG-

Per ACTION-2372, here is my proposed wording for the effects of masking
and clipping on pointer-events.  This actually supersedes similar
wording from an earlier erratum, which I have commented out to avoid
confusion.

Note that we had previously come to slightly different conclusions about
pointer events for clip paths [1], but this new wording is more
desirable and more consistent. [2]

Thoughts?

<h3 id="clip_mask_pointer-events">16.6.1 Clipping paths, masking, and
pointer events</h3>

<p>The effects of masking and clipping differ with respect to <a
href="interact.html#PointerEventsProperty">pointer-events</a>.  A clip
path is a geometric boundary, and a given point is clearly either inside
or outside that boundary; thus, pointer events must affect the visible
areas of a clipped element normally, and may effect the clipped areas
depending upon different values of the <a
href="interact.html#PointerEventsProperty">pointer-events</a> property,
as described in the definition of <a href="
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/masking.html#clipPath-geometry">clipping
paths</a>.  By contrast, a mask (like a filter) is not a binary
transition, but a pixel operation, and different behavior for fully
transparent and 'almost but not fully transparent' would be confusing;
as a consequence, for elements with a mask applied, pointer-events must
still be captured even in areas where the mask goes to zero opacity.  If
an author wishes to achieve an effect where the transparent parts of a
mask allow pointer-events to pass to an element below, a combination of
masking and clipping may be used.</p>

[1]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/errata.xml#clip-path-sensitive-pointer-events
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/errata/errata.xml#capturing-pointer-events-zero-opacity

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs

Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 23:59:09 UTC